Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.19 seconds)Suhrid Singh @ Sardool Singh vs Randhir Singh & Ors on 29 March, 2010
In fact, the legal position as settled in Suhrid Singh @
Sardool Singh v. Randhir Singh & Ors.' case (supra) is not in
dispute. Otherwise, it has to be held that if an executant of a deed
O.P(C).No.2322/2021 9
seeks cancellation of the deed, he has to pay advalorem court fee
on the consideration stated in the sale deed and if a non executant is
in possession and seeks for a declaration that the deed is null or
void and does not bind on him or his share, he has to merely pay a
fixed court fee, as provided under the relevant provisions of the
Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act. However, how far this ratio
would apply to the facts of the case, required to be addressed.
Article 17 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 27 in Telangana Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Satheedevi vs Prasanna & Anr on 7 May, 2010
8. The learned counsel for the petitioners placed decision
reported in [(2010) 5 SCC 622], Satheedevi v. Prasanna & anr. In
the said decision, the Apex Court considered payment of court fee
in relation to declaration regarding cancellation of a document.
Ultimately it was held that court fee payable under Section 41 of
the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 is based on the
value of the property for which the document was executed and not
O.P(C).No.2322/2021 6
its market value.
The Rajasthan Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1961
O.V. Usman Kurikkal vs Shri P. Achuthan Nair on 12 April, 2007
In another decision reported in [2012 (3) KLT 261], Usman
Kurikkal v. Parappur Achuthan Nair, this Court held that non
executant suing for a declaration that the deed as null or void and
does not bind his share, need not pay advalorem court fee on the
consideration fixed therein and the valuation shall be done under
Section 25(d)(ii) of the Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959.